The court can maintain a conviction for serious offenses even when lesser charges are settled out of court, reaffirming the severity of grievous harm.

O R D E R

The revision petitioner challenges the conviction and sentence against him under Sections 448, 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code in C.C.No. 460 of 1998 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thalassery. He faced prosecution on the allegation that at about 9.15 p.m. on 19.08.1997, he assaulted one Narayanan and his son Rajeevan, and inflicted simple injuries on the body of Rajeevan, and grievous injuries on the body of Narayanan.

2. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him by the trial court. The prosecution examined seven witnesses, including the two injured, and proved Exts.P1 to P6 documents in the trial court.

3. The accused examined DW1 in defence after his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., where he denied the incriminating circumstances.

4. On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty. On conviction, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 326 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 448 IPC, and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 323 IPC. Though the accused approached the Court of Session, Thalassery, with Crl.A.No. 415 of 1999, he could not succeed there. Now he has come up in revision before this Court.

5. Pending this revision, PW1 died at the General Hospital, Thalassery, on 09.08.2009. His legal heirs were impleaded as additional respondents 2 to 6 in this revision petition. Thereafter, the parties settled the whole dispute amicably out of court. PW2 is also one of the legal heirs of deceased Narayanan (PW1). They all have filed affidavit before this Court to the effect that the whole dispute stands settled, and they have no grievance or complaint now. The parties also filed a composition. But the composition was accepted only under Sections 448 and 323 IPC. The revision petitioner will have to be released from prosecution on the benefit of acquittal under Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. as regards the offences under Sections 448 and 323 IPC. But as regards the conviction under Section

326 IPC, the case will have to be decided on merits. 6. Of the seven witnesses examined in the trial court, PW1 is the defacto complainant, who sustained grievous injuries and who gave the First Information Statement. PW2 is his son, who also sustained injuries in the alleged incident. They have given clear evidence proving the assault made by the accused. Of course, PW2 had sustained only simple injuries like some tenderness and contusion on his face, but PW1 had sustained fracture of his right clavicle, and also fracture of three ribs. This is well proved by the medical evidence given by PW4. There is no reason to disbelieve PW1 and PW2, or to reject their evidence as regards the offence under Section 326 IPC. The two witnesses have given definite evidence on factual aspects, proving the assault made on them by the accused, and the infliction of grievous injuries on the body of PW1. I find no reason or ground for interference in the conviction and the findings made by the courts below under Section

326 IPC.

7. The whole dispute now stands amicably settled out of court. It is submitted that the accused has already compensated the legal heirs of deceased PW1, including PW2, adequately, and the learned counsel for the additional respondents submitted that they have no further claim for any compensation or monetary relief. The actual dispute between the parties stands now settled, and it is submitted that they are now on cordial terms.

8. In the above circumstances, I feel it appropriate to modify and reduce the jail sentence to the minimum possible under the law, and maintain the fine sentence with the default sentence thereon. When the parties have really settled the whole dispute out of court, it will be inappropriate and unjust to send the accused to jail. So as regards the offence under Section 326 IPC, I am inclined to modify the sentence in view of the settl